ASSESSMENT COURT.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2822, 1 March 1878, Page 2

ASSESSMENT COURT.

The Assessment Court for the purpose of hearing and determining all objections to the Valuation List for the Borough of Thames, was held at noon to-day, at the Warden's Court Home, before Captain Fraser, Judge.: G. Black, allotment, battery, enginehouse and buildings, assessed at £750. Property not rateable, being held under lease, license, or other authority from the Crown.

Mr Macdonald appeared for the applicant, and Mr E. Hesketh for the Borough. Mr Macdonald put in evidence the Assessment List of the Borough of Thames for the year 1878-79. Mr Macdonatd said he supposed it would bo contended that the respondents would argue under the 37th section of the Bating Act, but they claimed to be exempted on the ground that the land was held under lease, license, or other authority from the Crown. It would thus be necessary to prove that it was held under lease and license from the Crown; it would be necessary to put in two licenses signed by the Warden of the goldfield. It was not for him to anticipate what would be set up by the other side, but it might be said by them, though they (the appellants) held a license from the Crown, they also held the fee simple of the laud. He put in the two licenses, one of which would prore the locus cum quo, and the other ft an for a strip of land between the original license and the goldfields boundary. The property was only used for goldmining. Mr Hesketh asked that that be proved, as there was one point the Borough wished to raise.

Geo. Black, manager of the Big Pump Works, deposed—He was rated as the occupier of the Big Pump property, which was not used for any other purpose than mining purposes. The allotment was simply occupied by the plant, etc., and the battery was used for crushing quartz. It was employed exclusively for the pumping of water, winding of quartz, and crushing of the same.

By Mr Hesketh—The property rated includes the Imperial Crown ground only. The pump is. working now, and the water is coming from the shaft. The battery is crushing lor other parties. The water is applied to no purposes after it leaves the pump. By Mr Macdonald—The water is not now used for any purpoie wbaterer. By Mr Heslteth—The Kuranui Hill tributers are not charged specially for the winding of mullock. Mr Hesketh said he had no eridence to offer. He said the case had been placed in a nutshell now. The facts when admitted placed the Crown grant in opposition to the other grants. The freehold was private property before 1871. The question they wished to raise was that the property, having beloved to private party, could a goldmining license hare been granted for the property. His Worship said that he looked at a license signed by the Warden of the Goldfield as superior to any title. The Borough wanted him to decide that the mining giants signed by him were invalid.

Mr Hesketh said that if Hit Worship stood by those licenses that would be an end to the question. If it was shown that the land had gone to pri?ate individuals, had the Crown right to proclaim that a goldfield P The next question was if the property was not totally used for mining purposes was not the exemption entirely gone. Now, what was the meaning of milling purposes ? When the assessment list was being made, if it had been used other than for goldmining purposes, the properly was liable for rating.

It was true they did not ratike profit For | the Imperial Crown Company, but they got money irotn other companies for raising water. It appeared that they used their steam power for raising water from other mines, and then turned the water to advantage! Another question was, can a person who has not a title of his own but who is rated, claim to be exempt from rating because another who held a title was exempt? The 6th section of the Bating Act was the only part which enabledpersons to invoke another person's title. Supposing the allotment was used for other purposes than goldmining, they could not claim to be exempted. Mr Macdonald said tliat the ground was used only for goldmining purposes, and if it were held that the property could not be claimed to be exempt from rating as they allowed the land to be used for other purposes, all mines with tributes in the place were liable to rating. He endorsed the opinion of the Court in the first question raised by his learned friend. The second question resolved itself into this—That persons who made money by mining were liable to be rated. The third question was really part of the first, and' did not require answering. The question had also been raised that as there were persons residing on the property exempted it lost that privilege. It must be remembered, however, though there were houses on that property, they were rated. If Mr Hesketh't arguments were correct every claim from here to Funga Flat would be liable to rating, if a gum digger erected his hut on the ground. He referred to the mines paying gold duty instead of rates, and said that they had an equitable claim as well as a legal one to exemption. His Worship said he would strike out the property as not being rateable. Mr Hesketh said that as the decision in the case just heard would be the same ai in several others, they would make out a list.

After a delay of some * minutes it was announced that the following cases could be struck off:—C. J. Stone and J. M. Lennox for the Caledonian, J. Wardrop and R. Workman for the Golden Crown, T. L. Murray, T. A. Dunlop, Thomas James, H. H. Jones, I). Gh Macdoanell, Chas. Tothill. D. Gk MacDonnell—Allotment, engine* house, hoppers, office, winding gear, and part of tramway in Bella street, £400 ; vand allotment., battery and tramway, Pollen street, £400. Mr Hesketh said that in this case the tramway hoppers were on the street. He therefore argued that it should be rated under the Municipal Corporations Act, even though a license had been granted. If the Borough as originally formed was fettered by any goldmining licenses, the Municipal Corporations, as it were, released it from them. Mr Macdonald said his friend's arguments were more ingenious than sound. He argued that the license gave the holders a right to the surface. Mr Hesketh quoted from the Municipal Corporations Act, showing that a corporation had a right to sell any land obtained by the reduction in size of any street, and a title to which was affixed the seal of the Corporation might be considered a good and valid title. Assessment not confirmed. The appeal of the Kuranui Hill United G.M. Co. was sustained on the result of this case. William H. Heath—Allotment, winding gear, hoppers, etc. There was no appearance of the objector. Assessment confirmed. [Left Sitting.]